Search

Jane Austen and Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley

Patricia Leslie
4 days ago
5 min read

Updated: 3 days ago

Part two of My Year of Gothic Horror: Jane Austen and Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley

You may not think of Jane Austen as a horror writer, but her novel, Northanger Abbey (published 1817), includes the obligatory spooky castle, mysterious characters suspected of mysterious deeds, and mentions Ann Radcliffe’s ‘The Mysteries of Udolpho’. That’s enough for me! Mary Shelley published her famous novel, Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus, the year after Northanger Abbey. Shelley's fiction is horror at its best: mad scientist, rampaging monster bent on revenge, betrayal and murder.

Austen is also well known for her time spent in Bath (1801 to 1806), the setting for her novels, Persuasion and Northanger Abbey. Mary Shelley also spent time in this inspirational city (1817). In fact, this is where she wrote and edited the first part of Frankenstein before publishing in 1818.

Jane Austen and Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley have been written about many times before, but if you’d like some biographical information head over to Brittanica.com (or scroll down to my Source list).

List of works for each author are below.

Let’s get started.

sketch of author, Jane Austen. Drawing and paper is faded with age — Jane Austen. A sketch by Cassandra Austen (c 1810) *National Portrait Gallery (London)*

Northanger Abbey

Catherine Morland loves reading Gothic novels and is currently consumed by The Mysteries of Udolpho by Anne Radcliffe. It inspires her romantic notions and when she’s invited to visit Northanger Abbey, the home of the Tilney family. It is here that Catherine finds mysteries behind every door, every word and every mannerism. Her imagination runs a little wild, which suits Austen’s satirisation of Gothic fiction. Catherine is young, rather naïve, full of emotions and through her experiences at Bath and then at the Abbey, we feel the tension building. She’s also a little flighty and doesn’t perhaps quite know how to manage peer pressure, bullying, and the expectations of her elders. She learns to tell the difference between fiction and real life as she bounces from one experience to another. All of this is flows above the usual undercurrent of finding suitable husbands, wealth and social status.

I do enjoy this style of writing; light-hearted with light-romance and character development without too much intensity. Catherine Morland may not be overly smart, talented or ambitious but she’s honest and has an innate sense of integrity, which she expects to be mirrored in the people she befriends and loves. She’s the first to acknowledge that her depth of intelligence and experience may not be on par with everyone else, which isn’t too bad for an 18-year-old even in Georgian England. She seems to have benefited greatly from balanced parenting and a high degree of trust between the generations of her family, and she carries this with her into her future.

Jane Austen’s gentle digs at the gothic horror trend of the time are exactly that – gentle. She’s not so much making fun of the trend but enjoying the influence it is having on readers. While genre tells are introduced: creepy castle, suspect patrons and mysterious deaths, I think Northanger Abbey qualifies more as a play on gothic horror than a novel of the genre itself. I also think it ably describes the imaginative mind that connects to suitably imaginative literature. We see this in fans of fantasy and science fiction today through the countless role-playing opportunities, side-hustles, tourism and the overlap favourite genres often have on people’s lives (themed weddings anyone?).

Dark haired woman wearing strapless dress and sitting on a red sofa. — Mary Shelley. Oil on canvas by Richard Rothwell (c1831 to 1840) *On display in the National Portrait Gallery (London)*

Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus

Mary Shelley’s most famous work also contributed to her standing as the “mother of modern Science Fiction”. Scientist, Victor Frankenstein is driven to “overcome death and unlock the secrets of life” (Sparknotes.com/lit/Frankenstein). This singular focus sees him build a living man from dead body parts. There have been so many adaptions of the novel for stage, screen, and other novels that most of us are familiar with the concept of Shelley’s story. After all, “Frankenstein” has entered the popular lexicon. To “Frankenstein something” means to put together a hodge podge of spare parts to recreate them as something new (though not necessarily in good working order).

The author explores themes around ethics, the limits of humanity and science, and the pursuit of knowledge. Not bad for a teenager in the early 1800s. Underlying these, are Shelley’s exploration into the strength and importance of family connections. Did Shelley feel isolated from her family when she embarked on this novel? She was 17 when she “ran away” to be with Percy Bysshe Shelley. He was still married. Mary’s stepsister, Claire, accompanied her. A little wild herself, she later had an affair with Lord Byron. To say the Wollstonecraft/Godwin family dynamics were complicated might be a little understated.

While I enjoyed the “bones” of the story, I also found it long-winded. This was the style of the time, I guess, but note that Northanger Abbey is not similarly over filled with words. A contrast between the two, definitely. Frankenstein contained more of everything; more story to tell, more twists and turns, more background, more setting. Perhaps a combination of the two styles would suit me more.

I did think the crafting of the story quite clever. Short on scientific knowledge about the creation process, Shelley glossed over that part yet included enough storytelling around the journey and outcome of Frankenstein’s experiment that it was easy enough (as a reader) to suspend disbelief and put that aside. She also slotted in enough story around the narrator to allow for the connections between he and his friend, Frankenstein, to be clear.

They each yearned and searched for knowledge, for that something more from life that was handed to them at birth. The narrator also glimpsed his own potential (and unhappy) future if he didn’t regulate his thirst for knowledge and experience.

To know that this complicated story that explores science and morality and presents the causality between the two was written by a young woman in the early 1800s is mind-blowing. Just getting a decent education and being brave enough to leave family and home to broaden her horizons was an epic achievement. Being from a family that valued such things (to a point, of course) and moved in literary circles, was an immense benefit.

Aren’t we lucky?